Iran Nukes, Israels Right to Exist and other musings

[oedipusrex]

I have seen these topics discussed to varying lengths in several threads, they really should go together as the Iranian president has thrust the ongoing idea that Israel needs to cease to exist.

Iran having nukes under Khatami would be one thing. Under Ahmadinejad is another. But it is worth noting that Mahmoud does not have the final say in what happens in Iran and I only pray the people of Iran will wake up and see the hopelessness of this situation and make a change from within.

And it stands to reason that neither the United States or any nation within Europe (save for France) will allow any nation to possess a weapon that would be used to completely obliterate their strongest ally in the region.

Let the America bashing begin...come on...

I have seen the idea of just letting Israel be sacraficed for the greater good. How obsurd is that? And for what? So a completely fabricated race can establish a completely fabricated nation? (their leaders said it, i am using it as reference)

Off-topic, but keeping with the theme...

I can find at least five instances in the qu'ran where it is explicitly stated to kill the infidels (read: christians and jews) and if someone could locate just ONE instance in christian texts (read: new testament) where the mention of killing anyone is put forward, I am interested to know.

As for Islam being disgraced by only a few bad apples and made to look bad by their actions, I am not so sure. The WORLDWIDE protests over a few CARTOONS help set the wests perception of muslims as a whole. If someone drew unflattering cartoons of the christ -and it has happened- maybe people will get a chuckle, write a letter, be a little miffed. But it is a safe bet that no embassy will get attacked, no one will be kidnapped or beheaded over it.

The US has been accused of war crimes such as bombing civilians and making POWs do college-style hazing rituals. First, the enemy does not fight in accordance to the rules of combat as outlined by convention. They are not an organized or recognized army and they fight and hide among civilians while shooting at military targets. As witnessed in 1993 in Mogedishu, the US military takes great pains in eliminating the threat to civilians when fighting in an urban setting. And we know what happened then. If the US was to fight on the same level as al qaeda or any other known terrorist organization, it would be interesting to see and read the reactions of the people then. Also, if they would stop using children as suicide bombers and shields, then maybe the PR on their side would change.

Let the America bashing commence

[eagle]

If you want to bash the Bush administration sure , But I am in America and we ain't all in the same hay bail :roll:

[oedipusrex]

i am too.

i said "let the bashing begin" as i was forseening the assualt that was sure to come by mentioning what i did

[eagle]

i am too.

i said "let the bashing begin" as i was forseening the assualt that was sure to come by mentioning what i did

from my experience your more liekly to get bashed yourself making that statement but lets see how this unfolds

[eagle]

:twisted:

[Undercover]

Well, here's the thing. There are seven "official" nuclear powers, see the list here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_nuclear_weapons

But as the article goes on to point out, it is widely believed that Israel may have as many as 100 nuclear weapons.

South Africa was also widely believed to have had a nuclear weapon in the late 1980's as are Argentina and myriad other nations.

It's interesting to note that Pakisan is a bona fide nuclear power and they are also the home to the radical madrassahs that started all this bloody havoc in the Muslim world. But it's ok for them to have nuclear weapons because... they're our friend? Can somebody please explain this to me again? Like I'm a six-year old? Because I'm confused.

Let's take inventory:

Pakistan - ruthless military dictatorship, radical Muslims, nuclear power

They're our buddy!

Iran - ruthless military dictatorship, radical Muslims, nuclear power

Must invade!

Putting aside Israel's nukes for a moment, any nuclear attack on Israel would result in the absolute wholesale destruction of the attacking country by the USA. I don't know much but I am quite confident that there are plenty of American nuclear submarines with missiles less than 20 minutes from Tehran as we speak.... but it's probably better for everybody to find a pretext for invasion, spread some freedom and have a more friendly government as we did under our good buddy Reza Pahlavi (the Shah) for about 25 years. After we got rid of that pesky democratically elected guy Mossadegh in 1953. You can catch that one on the "CIA's Greatest Hits" (pun intended) compilation disk.

[i_love_som_tam]

israel strongly believes in taking pre-emptive measures to prevent any attacks upon them. these pre-emptive measures have been in the forms of assassinations and bombings. Like Gerald Bull when he developed the "super gun" for Iraq and the bombing of the plutonium producing reactor in Al Tuwaitha, Iraq.

with all the anti-semitic talk coming out of tehran you can be assured that if israel feels threatened in the least bit they will unleash all hell upon iran. i wouldn't be a bit surprised if israel had sniper teams on the ground in iran waiting for an opportune moment to take their prez out.

[oedipusrex]

Humorous pun, that was good. I do not disagree that US foreign policy can seem and has been a little self-serving. Yes, Pahlavi was not a good man any more than Diem was in Viet Nam. In retrospect, Uncle Ho would have been the better choice. Commies are no angels, but more fun to play with than muslim extremists!

Correction: Iran is not ruled by a military dictatorship and is actually, a democratically elected (chosen might be the better word) form of government. Not that I think the people actually had much say in it. Whether they voted to approve it or not, it was going to be implemented most likely by force.

Pakistan has, to my knowledge, never officially called for the destruction of Israel. They have their hands tied with India.

You do raise an interesting point that I want to expand on...

Lil Kim in NK blatently told the UN inspectors to kiss off, waved his missles in front of the US (quite literally) and took a "LOOK WHAT I CAN DO!" attitude and began the enrichment process not for energy, but for nukes and he proudly proclaimed that. The US government took a "Yeah, whatever" attitude and went after a "suspected" arms program in Iraq based on non-existent or forged intelligence.

This issue with Iran has fallen in the neocons lap like pennies from heaven. However, with the US military stretch rice-paper thin and little -if any- chance of the rest of the world jumping on board, this will be a war of bombs and spooks.

South Africa admitted to having a nuclear program, but it was scraped after the apartheid government was dissolved. Many, if not all former Soviet republics wanted the nukes off their soil after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

As for Israel having nukes, if it is true then they need to show them off. Flex some muscle with them and MAYBE then, the other nations would leave them alone. But this would be a multy part plan...

Try this...

What would happen if the US was able to convince Europe to go along with a plan to completely boycott Arab oil? And of course China and Russia went along too. Although Arab economies are horribly lopsided to favor those in power, namely the US backed ruthless monarchs, I would think that cutting off their lifes blood would make those monarchies collapse and send all Arab OPEC nations into a civil war. But having half a billion muslims vying for control of their nations and millions and millions of people in peril...how would people in the world react to that? I mean, the US being -currently at least- the largest consumer of Arab oil, would take a PR beating!!!

Respond and I will explain

[MikeAussieGuy]

Interesting thread, I will follow it very closely.

As for me I detest the thought of a nuclear weapons being used, against anyone for any reason, as 99.9% of those killed and suffering horrifying injuries and slow deaths are, invariably, innocent.

However one thing has always intrigued me about the stance against North Korea and Iran possessing nuclear weapons, how can a country, example the USA (read anyone), say to another country your not allowed to possess nuclear weapons when they themselves have more than enough to destroy the world several times over. Is this hypocrisy or what?

Let's face it Israel does have nuclear weapons, and a conventional weapon preemptive strike against Iran targeting their nuclear facilities will be the headlines before long. Then we will see whose friend is whose with oil going to $200+, ( the oil producing nations pray each day for this to happen particularly Russia and the South American countries with crap economies and huge debt). If they said they wont sell oil to the USA in order to bring them to their knees then the expression as used by the Mayor of Hiroshima in 1945 - did you hear that bang? - will be heard all over the world. The oil dependent countries, Japan, China, USA, England etc. etc even other Muslim countries would then be at war as the true power is not really weapons, but that black stuff. ( makes you wonder if Iraq is insurance for the USA and England doesnt it).

Would the Arab nations go against Israel for their "aggression" against Iran, (but does anyone really like Iran, except for France) for using a conventional weapon strike against a country that most have been to war with?

Would they be too afraid to, knowing Israel would protect itself anyway it had to, even by using nuclear weapons which they would do without a moments hesitation?

I think we will see something horrifying happening soon in regard to this issue.

[Brayon]

Ok Guys this is a really good topic, but there is a bigger one going on right now (war).

And it's most likely going to happen before anyone be able to use any Nuke Bomb?

It's called Global Warming, earth quakes, floods, volcano eruption,tornados, hurricane, ect. do not forget Tzunami???

Tried to find some pics, but too horrifying,

[Mikee_Moose]

Ok Guys this is a really good topic

It's called Global Warming, earth quacks,

Earth quacks? You mean Bird Flu? I didnt know THAT was caused by global warming. Now I AM worried !!

:?

[Brayon]

Ok Guys this is a really good topic

It's called Global Warming, earth quacks,

Earth quacks? You mean Bird Flu? I didnt know THAT was caused by global warming. Now I AM worried !!

:?

Thank you, Mr. English Teacher?

[Mikee_Moose]

Ok Guys this is a really good topic

It's called Global Warming, earth quacks,

Earth quacks? You mean Bird Flu? I didnt know THAT was caused by global warming. Now I AM worried !!

:?

Thank you, Mr. English Teacher?

Come on, that was funny stuff. You didnt have to go insulting me.

[zeusbheld]

can't believe i didn't notice this steaming pile of smug, self-congratulatory hypocrisy before.... excuse my tardiness pls.

...

I can find at least five instances in the qu'ran where it is explicitly stated to kill the infidels (read: christians and jews) and if someone could locate just ONE instance in christian texts (read: new testament) where the mention of killing anyone is put forward, I am interested to know.

well, i'm assuming you're not including God offering up his son to be killed and tortured, how about revelations?

Revelations 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

you should read the books before you write your book report. GRADE: F-.

The WORLDWIDE protests over a few CARTOONS help set the wests perception of muslims as a whole. If someone drew unflattering cartoons of the christ -and it has happened- maybe people will get a chuckle, write a letter, be a little miffed. But it is a safe bet that no embassy will get attacked, no one will be kidnapped or beheaded over it.

violent protests? you mean like shooting at and bombing abortion clinics?

As for Islam being disgraced by only a few bad apples and made to look bad by their actions, I am not so sure.

as for christianity being disgraced by only a few bad apples and made to look bad by their actions, i am not so sure.

[kz1]

However one thing has always intrigued me about the stance against North Korea and Iran possessing nuclear weapons, how can a country, example the USA (read anyone), say to another country your not allowed to possess nuclear weapons when they themselves have more than enough to destroy the world several times over. Is this hypocrisy or what?

*sigh*

it doesnt matter if it's hypocrisy or not. it's not in americas best interest for other countries to have nuclear weapons, specifically countries who are not our ally, especially countries who are adversary. to critisize america for not wanting north korea to have nuclear weapons is absolutely rediculous.

seems anti-americans are generally very ignorant people, yet they critisize americans for the same thing? that, sir, is hypocrisy.

anti-americans, most often europeans, austrailians etc. with their holier than though attitudes, and are some of the most ignorant, arrogant, and most of all hypocritical people on this earth, i would say much more so than americans in general.

BTW, im from poland born and raised, am not an american citzen, but attended school there up until a few years ago. nicest, most friendly, accomidating people as a whole ive ever met.

I suppose lesser countries will always critisize the superpower, luckily you're allowed to do so openly without consequence. would like to add, if you think instead of big bad america being the superpower, rather europe or say austrailia was the world superpower, that the world would be better off or some utopean paradise, you're sadly mistaken.

sorry for the rant on anti-americans, just very annoyed by their ignorance, stupidity and extreme hipocrisy.

-kz

[CiaranM]

...

I can find at least five instances in the qu'ran where it is explicitly stated to kill the infidels (read: christians and jews) and if someone could locate just ONE instance in christian texts (read: new testament) where the mention of killing anyone is put forward, I am interested to know.

Zeus - your taking this out of context

Your quote refers to the revelation of Jesus Christ delivered to his servant John by an Angel. This particular verse refers to God's punishment of particular sinners (Jezebels).

oedipusrex quote refers to individuals (humans) being encouraged by Islam to kill those with different beliefs (Christians and Jews - other humans) as an accepted practice of their faith.

It really is quite different....

it might be different but oedipusrex has asked for ONE instance of a mention of killing ANYONE in christian text. looks to me like that's what Zeus has provided. if it's not the answer u want then U (or oedipusrex) needs to ask a different question !!

btw u f**ked up the quote boxes and i couldn't be bothered fixing them. that's why only part of it is quoted !!